 |
|
Jason Beaudoin
|
|
Canada
Jan 1970 time: 00:15
|
|
Unless you're really, really behind, I don't think that it is always possible for a player to get back into the game. There are so many ways to win, that there is always a way to bounce back. Particularly since new resources can totally shift the balance of power. Just think of what could happen when a nation has a virtual monopoly over uranium!
That could certainly change things.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
TechWins
|
 |
Arizona
Apr 2001 time: 22:15
|
|
quote: The inevitable winner syndrome comes from bigger is better syndrome. |
If done correctly bigger is always better. Now to do it correctly in Civ3 I think it will require great precision of your empire and hardwork. For all empires, regardless of size, one will have to balance out five major areas of one's empire, culture, military, science, trade, and general improvements. Now to do this on a large empire could be very difficult. Wait, let me retract my previous statement, 'it WILL be very difficult'. BAB will hold true to a degree, but to achieve BAB in Civ3 one will have to be a great strategists.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Akillias
|
|
you could use the civ 3 editor and put uranium oil and rubber all over ur starting location
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Spatzimaus
|
|
"Bigger is better" has been the theme of all the Civ games, but in previous titles this was then extended to "and aggressive makes bigger". It sounds like Civ 3 has added some nice features to counteract that, especially in the Culture area.
In Civ 2, when you took over a city, the only difference between it and your older cities was the unhappiness and that it had lost some buildings. Not a difficult thing to solve, just make more Elvises and rebuild the buildings; it won't be long before the city is a productive part of your empire.
In Civ 3, when you take over a city the culture structures don't help the other side, and the "age bonus" disappears, so it'll never really get back to its previous glory. This makes it ripe for a cultural takeover, and it should take a lot longer to make people happy again.
Also, correct me if this has been changed, but somewhere it said that Small Wonders are destroyed when a city is captured (I'd assume to prevent possible duplicates). There's no more taking technology as you go, since there are no more spies. Cities you capture probably won't be connected to your road network, so you won't be able to use the strategic resources to build good defensive troops right away (it'd be funny to see people making stone age warriors in the 1900s just because they have no resources connected to their beachhead- what's the best unit that doesn't require a strategic resource?). If all that's not enough, attackers can't use roads to invade, providing a nice defensive advantage.
All this seems to combine to say that an aggressive race will fall behind technologically and culturally. Which, hopefully, will mean that playing a peaceful scientific culture could actually be a viable strategy!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
UKScud
|
|
Auckland, NZ
Sep 2001 time: 05:15
|
|
quote: it'd be funny to see people making stone age warriors in the 1900s just because they have no resources connected to their beachhead- what's the best unit that doesn't require a strategic resource? |
You are very very right!
But won't technological process make ancient units obsolete...CAN you build an older unit (out of desperation) if resources are suddenly denied to you?
It seems to me that the resources model will probably be the most important change in the game...it makes everyone, even the bigger Civs, vulnerable.
You can ask allies to not trade certain resources. Denial on the diplomatic front.
You can ask allies to SELL you the specific good if your treasury can cope with it, and its the only extra good of that type the other civ has. Denial by economic
Even if some Civs continue to trade, you have blockades of harbours (and, though much more difficult, airports in the mdern age) to prevent this. That means naval action just became a whole lot more important too. (say Mr. AI...do YOU know how to use an aircraft carrier correctly???
Finally, just occupying the square that the resource is on will deny it to the enemy...though it's pretty obvious that they will do everything in their power to oust you from the area.
The longer you hold it, and the more effectively you can defend..build a fortress...use terrain around the resource to defend the area...let the enemy use its military strength (which it cannot rebuild as effectively) trying to beat down your defensive units...soon enough the enemies military strength is depleted and you can start to take other aspects of their empire apart...I would think cities near the imortant resource are a good first bet...either raze em and build your own, or take over the enemies cities so that the resource comes under YOUR influence for good.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Deathray
|
|
High Wycombe
Oct 2001 time: 05:15
|
|
I'm thinking that there will be many, many ways for a human player to get out of a situation where an AI player is inevitably going to win. Whether the AI will use them or not is doubtful, but anyway:
1) Turn your army of puppet civs on them (you do have an army of puppet civs don't you?).
2) Be extra nice to your army of puppet civs and get them to vote for you at the UN meetings.
3) Get your army of puppet civs to boycott trade with your enemy. Do it yourself as well. Lets see you kick my arse without your precious horse supplies Mr. Kahn.
4) Find a weak spot in their empire and use it to your advantage.
5) Make peace with them, mass your forces and hit their capital when they're not looking.
6) Read Sun Tzu's Art of War and kick their arses the honourable way.
Please note: puppet civ armies are incredibly useful. Never leave home without one.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15. Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|